Dear Annelise
Thank you for your emails of 15 February, 8 and 11 March 2010, regarding the independent review of ACC's Clinical Pathway (the Pathway) for sensitive claims. I apologise for the delay.
I acknowledge your concern about the changes. Before the Pathway was implemented on 27 October 2009, ACC agreed to my request for an independent review six months after implementation. The Pathway had to have been operating for a period of time to produce meaningful data and results that can be fairly assessed by an independent review.
The review is now underway, led by Dr Barbara Disley, former Chair of the Mental Health Commission and former Chief Executive of the Mental Health Foundation. The review panel welcomes submissions to ClinicalPathwayReviewSubmissions@researchnz.com or posted to Clinical Pathway Review Submissions, PO Box 1039, Wellington 6140.
You can access the terms of reference, and information about the members of the review panel at: www.beehive.govt.nz/release/sensitive+claims+review+announced. I believe the members of the review panel have the necessary skills and experience to bring a fresh and independent perspective to this difficult area of ACC's work. I expect the review panel to report their findings to me in July 2010.
Thank you again for your emails. ACC has not made these changes lightly, and has invested a lot of time and research in trying to develop the best possible process and support for clients within the limits of the Accident Compensation Act 2001. I am looking forward to the outcome of the review to ensure that the new sensitive claims process achieves this aim.
Yours sincerely
Hon Dr Nick Smith
Minister for ACC
That is funny. It seems we all got letters from him on the same day saying pretty such the same thing. What is interesting is I got an email from Peter Jansen a while back saying:
ReplyDeleteHi Lisa, again I note is is not appropriate for me to correspond directly with Members of Parliament.
You are correct that the Clinical Pathway is not the same as the Massey Guidelines. ACC has not ever suggested that they are the same.
The Pathway is the mechanism by which clients who lodge a claim will gain access to timely assessment and then effective therapy. A key aspect of the Pathway is early assessment so we can understand what mental injury caused by sexual assault / abuse is present and thereby ensure therapy and support matches the clients needs. There is no shortage of qualified health professionals for undertaking these assessments.
There was no Pathway prior to October 2009.
I am sure that nurses like other health professionals support the use of evidence-based practices using tools such as the Massey Guidelines. ACC has recommended that therapists follow the Massey Guidelines.
The Clinical Pathway does draw on information from the Massey Guidelines. The purpose of that is to ensure ACC funds effective treatment and support based on clinical needs identified by qualified health professionals. ACC has not sought endorsement of the Pathway, as responsibility for this arrangement rests with ACC.
regards, Peter Jansen
Interesting, how Dr. Jansen says they NEVER source endorsement for the pathway. If they had of source endorsement we wouldn't be in this bloody mess now. Also, likely confirms the fact that the RCNZGP statement was probably actually written by himself, as it's rumoured to have been him on the Committee writing the statement that Harry Pert signed his name to and since then the RCNZGP has backed away from this statement and how changed their position.
"There is no shortage of qualified health professionals for undertaking these assessments"?? Total bollocks. It took seven months before I could get an appointment for a DATA assessment and I expect to wait just as long for the report. Anecdotally, there is only one psychologist in Canterbury doing DATAs at the moment. My ACC case worker told me that she has 1,000 clients. Jansen is fiddling while Rome burns...
ReplyDeleteI know Annelise. Like ACC even CHECKED to see if there was going to be enough staff to do the DSM-IV assessments before they put this pathway in place? Most Psychiatrists and Clinical Psychologists in NZ work in the Public Health System so aren't available to do the assessments and that doesn't leave many left (especially in the smaller or rural centres who have none).
ReplyDeleteMakes you wonder how much of a brain you need to be an "expert" at ACC to come up with those conclusions?